IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Narula, J.
Blue Heaven Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Shivani Cosmetics - Respondent
CS(COMM) 702 of 2021
Decided On : 23-12-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemptions and applications regarding documentation (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. procedure for registering the suit and issuing summons (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. allegations of trademark infringement and passing off (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. arguments on the fraudulent nature of the defendant's conduct (Para 18 , 19) |
| 5. court's assessment on prima facie evidence of infringement (Para 20 , 21) |
| 6. court's interim orders and future listing (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
ORDER
[VIA HYBRID MODE]
This matter has been listed pursuant to an urgent listing.
I.A. No. 17435/2021 (seeking exemption from filing certain documents, clear copies and English translations) and
I.A. No. 17437/2021 (u/Section 151 of CPC, r/w Order XI Rule 6(3) Commercial Court Act, 2015 for declaration of the copies of the documents filed alongwith the plaint)
1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Plaintiff shall file better copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
I.A. No. 17436/2021 (u/Order XI Rule 1(4) (as amended by the Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 r/w Section 151 of CPC, 1908) seeking leave to file additional documents)
4. This is an application seeking leave to file additional documents under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
5. The Plaintiff, if they wish to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the said Act.
6. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
I.A. No. 17438/2021 (for exemption from exhausting the remedy of pre-institution mediation)
7. Having regard to the facts of the present case, exemption from attempting pre-institution mediation is allowed.
8. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
CS(COMM) 702/2021
9. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
10. Issue summons. Upon filing of process fee, issue summons to the remaining Defendants by all permissible modes. Summons shall state that the written statement shall be filed by the Defendants within 30 days from the date of receipt of summons. The written statements shall be filed by the Defendants within 30 days from today. Along with the written statement, the Defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the Plaintiff, without which the written statements shall not be taken on record.
11. Liberty is given to the Plaintiff to file replications within 15 days of the receipt of the written statements. Along with the replications, if any, filed by the Plaintiff, an affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the Defendants, be filed by the Plaintiff, without which the replications shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
12. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 11th April, 2022. It is made clear that any party unjustifiably denying documents would be liable to be burdened with costs.
13. List before the Roster Bench on 18th May, 2022
I.A. 17434/2021 (u/Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking interim injunction)
14. The Plaintiff has filed the above captioned suit for infringement of registered trademark/trade-dress/copyright/writing style/colour combination/label/packaging/passing off goods, delivery up, rendition of Accounts of profits, and other ancillary reliefs.
15. The case as set out in the plaint is that, the Plaintiff is a private limited company dealing in the manufacturing and marketing of goods falling in Class-03 and 35 under the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 under the registered trademarks
and
(word mark as well as formative marks) since 1972, (details of registration whereof are mentioned in the plaint). It is stated that the Plaintiff/Applicant keeps changing the packaging/labels of its products from tim



![]() | ![]() |
![]() | ![]() |
![]() | ![]() |



A plaintiff must demonstrate a prima facie case of trademark infringement, supported by evidence of prior use and likelihood of consumer confusion to obtain an ex-parte injunction.
The court upheld that protecting registered trademarks from potentially infringing use requires establishing a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and potential for irreparable harm.
The court affirmed that trademark owners are entitled to an interim injunction against unauthorized similar use that may confuse consumers, prioritizing the prevention of irreparable harm over potent....
The court established that a prima facie case for relief exists when trademark infringement is evident, justifying ex parte interim injunction to prevent irreparable harm.
Trademark infringement and passing off claims were established due to the unauthorized use of a competitor's trademark, justifying ex-parte injunction and domain suspension.
The court directed parties to align trademark registrations with previously accepted settlement terms regarding trade dress and packaging, while facilitating the procedural filing of additional docum....
Trademark law recognizes the importance of avoiding consumer confusion between similar marks, especially in pharmaceuticals, while encouraging mediation to resolve disputes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.